they've had NINE YEARS of R&D and tech advances. I doubt they would release an inferior product.

you also have to take anything a company or "testimonial" tells you with a grain of saltOf course they are not going to say, these stink in comparison.Imo unless you do your own listening or find people you trust those are a waste.

You have to acknowledge that it's often not simple or practical to set up the environment for a proper ABX like what you're looking for...

I didn't say proper, I said casual. As in, even a minimum level of effort put forth to help (or entertain) the community. There is no need for "professional reviewers" or access to expensive equipment. If one simply learns how to read and interpret the basic noise measurements, which are already done using Audio Precision equipment, it will be immediately obvious how a 70d vs. a MixPre Series vs. a 7xx Series might differ in sound. This published specifications already tell the complete story. Period.

We both know that no one here possesses the time, equipment, or knowledge to perform a "proper" comp, so why even bother to ask an anecdotal question about "sound" when it can't possibly be answered "properly?" I'd settle for the entertainment of a casual comp, but we don't even get that.

More importantly, anecdotes about the "sound" of a preamp and/or recorder aren't helpful, they're actually harmful. Asking how the Kashmir preamps compare to those in the 788T is nothing more than a tire kicking, window-shopping question; both units are already very near the theoretical limits for performance.

I get what you're saying that either way the performance is still probably very high, but I don't believe that specs always tell the whole story.

My call for comparison with the 788 is based upon SD previously saying that those were their finest preamps out of their entire line of 6- and 7- series, and later saying the new Kashmir pres are equal or better. Yes, the specs look great, but as I said before it's how they can do it at such a low price while still being US made that interests me. If we were comparing a 788 to similar Aeta or Zaxcom units, then it would be more or less tire-kicking as you say.

Specs can also be presented in a way to impress those who are less informed, and it's unfortunate that a no-BS company like SD has done this in a couple places with this new series. See, for example, the so-called "32 bit precision" of the ADC (as if that mattered), or that they're featuring -130 dBV EIN in marketing statements because it looks more impressive than the equivalent -128 dBu in the way you'd typically see it expressed.

It's not very likely I'll ever get the comparison I'm interested in anyway, since no one who already owns a 788 is likely to buy a 10T because of the feature difference as you pointed out.

Unlike specs or company hype my ears have never let me down. I trust em. Different flavors for different peeps. The euphonious distortion caused by transformers ain't for everyone I love it. Nothing to do with specs.

Duly noted. Unfortunately, you will probably never find the level of sophisticated discussion you're looking for on this forum. The published specifications for each device already tell virtually everything you need to know, yet the ability to reference them in meaningful discussion is like asking people to explain quantum mechanics. Seemingly, the only question ever asked is "how do they sound?" followed by a total absence of even casual comparison samples.

If we just look at a few simple specs (EIN, S/N Ratio, and THD), the answer is incredibly simple. Units like the 70d, M10, etc. perform around -120dBu EIN. This is already pretty good, however units include the SD 7xx series, 6xx series, Mixpre series, the Sony PCM-D100, or the Sonosax/Aeta recorders (just to name a few) are all going to be measurably better. Around -128dBu to -130dBu EIN, and quite frankly, it's never going to get any better than that. All of these units are world class recorders (even when marketed as mixers) and I would challenge anyone here prove even a small difference between something like the 7xx recorders and the "Kashmir" preamps. It's marketing hype, nothing more.

I probably sound grumpy and truth be told I am because how "how do they sound" is a stupid fucking question thrown around constantly on this forum. Feature such as form factor, battery life, redundancy, gain control, reliability, etc. are infinitely more important even when recording mosquito farts. Unless you're putting a transformer in the signal path, these units all "sound" the same (and sound really damn good). No one should be ditching a 7xx recorder for "Kashmir" preamps, especially when the feature set of the 7xx recorders is still significantly more robust.

I own a 722 and love it. But I'm lacking a really good solution for 4 channels (I have a Zoom H6 which is ok, and an old R4 that I just don't use because of the file transfer hassle from that unit to the computer). These new mix pre's look really tempting, especially considering the price, and a good opportunity for me to get into a higher quality 4+ channel device. I'm just wondering what the new versions lack in feature set compared to the 7xx series? Thanks

Yes, the specs look great, but as I said before it's how they can do it at such a low price while still being US made that interests me.

Quote from: Paul Isaacs

There are many reasons why there is a cost difference between the 702 and MixPre: the 702 is over 10-year old technology. Progress in component performance and DSP/FPGA, efficiencies in manufacturing and design, different code architecture, use of different materials and components, different I/O, different feature sets and more.

I own a 722 and love it. But I'm lacking a really good solution for 4 channels (I have a Zoom H6 which is ok, and an old R4 that I just don't use because of the file transfer hassle from that unit to the computer). These new mix pre's look really tempting, especially considering the price, and a good opportunity for me to get into a higher quality 4+ channel device. I'm just wondering what the new versions lack in feature set compared to the 7xx series? Thanks

Great question and I hear you. If you're stuck on the 722/702T, well a big feature missing is the extra channels. Hard to argue with that. My statement was aimed more at 744T/788T users, but for someone with a 722 here's some of the 'robust' features I see missing on the MixPre series:

- Pre-roll recording buffer- Dual-Media Recording- Compact Flash Support (can be important due to SD Card compatibility issues)- Support for Mono Wav, MP3, and FLAC recording (Only Poly Wav is supported)- AES3 / SPDIF Digital Inputs and Outputs- Balanced L/R Outputs (TA3) (absent on MixPre3/6, only available on Mixpre10T)- Timecode / Wordclock generator (absent on MixPre3/6, only available on Mixpre10T)- Hirose Power Connector (absent on MixPre3/6, only available on Mixpre10T)

For the casual taper, I wouldn't consider most of these missing features to be huge deal-breakers. Timecode / Wordclock is probably the biggest missing feature for the professional user, but 99% of the time is irrelevant for the average concert taper.

The lack of a Hirose connector seems to be annoying from the threads I've been reading in the Remote Power section and the only solution is to buy a pretty expensive sled adapter. It puts your $899 recorder well over $1000 and you're having to buy a 3rd party product. Not sure why Sound Devices didn't come out of the gate with their own adapter products.

For me, the lack of Digital I/O support is probably the biggest issue. This might be unimportant for a 722 owner, but as 744T user (and previously DR-680), one of the main reasons for having extra channels is to take a digital patch from another taper in the section. After running an 8-channel deck, I quickly found that my desire to run more than one set of stereo mics + take a board feed was usually pretty minimal, but I almost always want to grab a buddy's pull so I could do casual listening tests at home. I'm usually running Schoeps, so when a friend was running MiLabs or MBHO's, I wouldn't hesitate to grab a feed from their digital output if I had spare channels. However, my enthusiasm for taking a feed usually was tempered if I had to take an analog patch, which on the MixPre series is the only option as there are no digital inputs, even on the 10T.

I'm also incredibly unimpressed with Sound Devices ability to write to SD Cards in the year 2017. I'm sorry, but having to have an approved SD card list is bullshit and having to buy your SD cards directly from Sound Devices feels like outright fraud. There are countless recorders / mixers on the market, including the 7xx recorders, that rarely, if ever, have problems writing to removable storage. You don't see Sonosax, Nagra, or even Trashcam (for the most part) having this problem the way Sound Devices does. Compact Flash, while expensive and lower capacity, is more reliable, as is an internal hard drive. This is a big deal to me as I know that my trusty 744T is going to successfully capture the recording every time. The internal HDD (SDD in my case) is a feature I simply do not want to give up.

On a final note, I would also say that that user interface, include touchscreen and joystick, are a step in the wrong direction. They are more cost-efficient to build, but I cannot tell you the number of times I have seen issues with them in the Sound Devices Facebook group. Over the past 3-4 years (or however long the 6 series have been out), I have constantly seen busted/cracked LCD screens or software corrupted displays that are unreadable. With the 7xx series, the worst that would happen is a burnt LED. I don't need a color display, I don't like having to excessively access menus, and I like physical buttons.

So there you have it. I wouldn't hesitate to buy a MixPre6 at $899 simply for the extra channels, but if you already own a 744 or 788 I wouldn't bother.

Can I ask wtf anyone needs 10 inputs for doing what we do? I get four channels but ten? Hosting others mics?

You're right, we don't. These units aren't even marketed to "us." They're designed for the needs of pro sound and film users and forums like JW Sound, which I would encourage anyone who hasn't to check out, are a better place to find discussion relevant to all features these units provide. These units can still be used by concert tapers, but typically only use the most basic recording features are leveraged.

The truth is, concert tapers have long since been forgotten by the major equipment manufactures. Even Grace Design has forgotten about us as the last field recording product they released was the Spacebar, which I think was about 10 years ago. We'd all love to see them produce a 4-channel V4 preamp/recorder designed for field use, but it's seemingly never going to happen.

Yes, the specs look great, but as I said before it's how they can do it at such a low price while still being US made that interests me.

Quote from: Paul Isaacs

There are many reasons why there is a cost difference between the 702 and MixPre: the 702 is over 10-year old technology. Progress in component performance and DSP/FPGA, efficiencies in manufacturing and design, different code architecture, use of different materials and components, different I/O, different feature sets and more.

Can I ask wtf anyone needs 10 inputs for doing what we do? I get four channels but ten? Hosting others mics?

hosting other mics. but i've been wanting to do multitrack direct outs from the soundboard for a while. that way i can mix to my liking at home and not have to take the sometimes poor board main mix. for a solo or duo with multiple instruments, 8 or 10 is just about perfect.